Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Manley


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep.  Sandstein  19:18, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Scott Manley

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

insufficient evidence for notability as youtuber or otherwise Uncertain about the whether the sources are RS for notability.  DGG ( talk ) 05:58, 14 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom. My WP:BEFORE also failed to find any WP:SIGCOV FOARP (talk) 18:42, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Scott Manley, although not very famous to the general public, is very notable among circles of people who are interested in gaming and science. I have provided farther evidence on the matter. 20:58, 14 December 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianKovo (talk • contribs)
 * Keep. @ and, I urge you guys to reconsider this one. See this feature in Seeker, this feature in ShackNews, and this one in Universe Today. The guy is relatively famous in the admittedly small internet/astronomy/spaceflight cross section subculture, but there are a lot of other people named 'Scott Manely' that can confuse google searches (not surprised that you didn't find these). I managed to find a lot of sources by searching "scott manley" space and digging through false positives. There are a ton of other sources which mention him in less than significant detail and clearly consider him to be somewhat of an expert in his niche 'astronogamer' field. A small sample of what is available:   . —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  (click me!)    11:16, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * This AfD reminded me that Tim Dodd didn't have an article yet either (a similar space-related YouTuber), so thanks for that. Cheers, —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) (click me!)    11:46, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:21, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:21, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:22, 15 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment' . Of the 3 principal sources. Seeker & Shacknews seem to be interviews which simply let him say whatever he pleases about himself & his work, & is therefore not a true 3rd person source;  the Universe Today item is a brief view of one of his livestreamed games. It is difficult to differentiate such interviews that are real coverage selected to highlight someone of importance, or mere promotional arrangements. In dealing with companies and individual professionals, we now generally assume per WP:NCORP that such interview are promotional, but this is not the first bio article I've seen where it might be otherwise. On that basis, I'm willing to withdraw the AfD.  DGG ( talk ) 18:59, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , You are correct about Slacknews being mostly an interview, I should have mentioned this, but I certainly wouldn't characterise the Seeker article as primarily an interview at all. There is currently a discussion involving interviews and notability, but it seems that many agree that articles containing interview questions can still contribute to notability so long as the article also describes and discusses the subject separately from interview questions. In this case, I'd agree Slacknews probably does not contribute to notability in this case, but argue that both seeker and Universe Today do (Slacknews does have a ton of good information for the article though). The Universe Today article seems to me to be as much about Manley himself as the content of his video being reviewed. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) (click me!)    19:26, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:25, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep as per 's sources. The article can be expanded with decent coverage. –eggofreasontalk 16:53, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep as per the above phrases - notability seems fairly clear. And remember, Fly Safe. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:50, 28 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.